NEXT PAGE -->
|
We have an unconfirmed report that the $10 million earmarked for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that was part of the final $120 million efficiency/renewables add-on in the omnibus appropriations bill will go to the Program for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV). The $60 million included for the Department of Energy's renewable energy programs reportedly was made TWO-year money which means that the congressional appropriations committees can take it away next year! According to sources from within DOE, the Energy Information Administration got $2.5 million so it is funded at the full request of $70.5 million while fossil energy got between $7.5-$8 million for sequestration and possibly methane hydrate R&D
2.) Renewables Funding:
An article in the October 27 "Energy Daily" reported that a new study on federal energy subsidies "has found renewable energy receives the largest federal subsidy after oil, but provides the poorest return on investment." The study "Federal Subsidies and Incentives for the Energy Industries" by Management Information Services claims that oil received $272 billion while renewables received $90 billion; natural gas got $68 billion, coal also got $68 billion; and nuclear energy got $61 billion. The funds included budgetary outlays, tax incentives, regulatory actions, and R&D expenditures. The study argues that "federal R&D funds for renewables are misaligned and that if the near-term policy objective is to address global warming and utility restructuring, the energy return on this money would be much greater if its invested in nuclear and fossil energy research." Let us know if you want to see the article.
ELECTRIC UTILITY RESTRUCTURING
1.) Restructuring Initiatives:
In Massachusetts, the October 22 "Boston Globe" reports that the campaign to repeal the state's restructuring law has been outspent by a ratio of 20 to 1 ($4.5 million vs. $220,000) by the law's supporters. According to recent polling conducted by Boston Globe/WBZ, 65% of respondents are in favor retaining the deregulation law. In California, the October 25 "Bakersfield Californian" reports that the most recent Field Poll has found that Proposition 9 to repeal the stranded cost portion of the state's restructuring bill is opposed by 45% of likely voters and supported by only 19%, with 36% undecided. Supporters of Proposition 9 have been able to raise only about $1 million while opponents have so far spent more than $30 million to oppose the initiative.
2.) Green Energy/Rebuttal:
An open letter responding to the new Public Citizen report criticizing California's "green market" has been released by the Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club (CA), Global Green USA, and the Center for Energy Efficiency & Renewable Technologies. They note that they "strongly disagree" with Public Citizen's view that the retail electricity market is "a failure for renewable resources and a boondoggle for consumers." The authors argue that "renewable resource developers are now moving forward to build 55 new renewable projects in California ... this is more new investment in renewables than we have seen in the previous ten years. ... in only the first year of restructuring, California is experiencing an approximately 7% increase in planned renewable capacity." Let us know if you would like us to fax you a copy of the 4-page letter.
CLIMATE CHANGE
1.) Kyoto Opposition Splinters:
The October 30 "Wall Street Journal" reports that the coalitions of oil, automobile, utility, and other companies that opposed the Kyoto Protocol last year are showing some strain as individual companies are repositioning themselves on the issue. It notes, for example, that General Motors Corp. has begun to work with environmental groups and joined the International Climate Change Partnership, a group of more than 40 companies and trade associations working with the Clinton Administration in support of the treaty. It also notes that British Petroleum Co. and Royal Dutch/Shell Group have recently dropped their memberships in the Global Climate Coalition which has opposed the Kyoto Protocol. Separately, the Pew Center on Global Climate Change reported on October 29 that CH2M HILL and DuPont have joined 18 other companies, many of which rank in the Fortune 500, in the organization's Business Environmental Leadership Council. DuPont is reportedly on track to meet a goal announced in 1991 to achieve a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions for operations by the year 2000.
2.) Free Calls to Gore:
The National Environmental Trust reports that Working Assets Long Distance is sponsoring a White House call-in on global warming. People can call absolutely free (1-888-38-STAND-UP) by November 6 -- transfer to the White House comment line and tell Vice President Gore their views about signing the Kyoto climate treaty and initiating programs to phase out fossil fuels. It is also possible to contact the Vice President via fax at 202-456-7044 or e-mail at
Vice-President@whitehouse.gov.
3.) Nukes/Climate Change:
In a speech October 28 to environmental groups, Department of State Undersecretary Stuart Eizenstat stated: "I believe very firmly that nuclear has to be a significant part of our energy future and a large part of the western world, if we're going to meet these [emission reduction] targets. ... Those who think we can accomplish these goals without a significant nuclear industry, I think are simply mistaken. ... In the energy mix, nuclear [power] can't be excluded." Eizenstat acknowledged that the storage problem must be worked out, but he said environmental groups must "rethink" their position on nuclear power and the role it can play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
MISCELLANEOUS
1.) Nuclear Decline:
In mid-October, Germany's incoming Social Democrat and Green Party government agreed to abandon nuclear power and plans to begin talks next year with utility companies on a timetable for closing nuclear plants. In Switzerland, the government announced on October 22 that it intends to negotiate "fixed closure dates" for the country's five nuclear power plants sometime between 2012 and 2024. On October 23, the French government indicated a willingness to diversify its energy operations and drop its all-nuclear energy policy. The new head of France's state-owned Electricite De France said the company needs to diversify its energy resources as the European Union prepares to open its electricity market to wider competition in February 1999.
2.) Ethanol from Cellulose:
On October 20, the U.S. Department of Energy and BC International Corp. opened a new plant in Jennings, Louisiana that will produce 20-25 million gallons per year of ethanol from agricultural waste materials including sugar cane bagasse and rice hulls. Corn is now the main feedstock for most of the U.S. ethanol industry's 1.7 billion gallons of production capacity. The Renewable Fuels Association notes that "the potential for significant expansion is astounding when you look at the near-limitless resources available from agricultural crops, waste products, and residues."
FEDERAL ENERGY BUDGET
FY'99 Budget Add-on:
The final omnibus appropriations bill included an add-on of $120 million for energy efficiency (EE) and renewable energy (RE) programs. This includes $50 million for EE, $60 million for RE, and $10 million for the U.S. EPA (either for its "green" programs or the Program for a New Generation of Vehicles). That translates into a FY'99 RE budget of $336.0 million and a FY'99 EE budget of $692.3 million or $1,028.3 million combined. However, remember that $50 million from FY'98 renewables was still raided to fund FY'99 so the net increase in RE funding in FY'99 is about $14 million or 5%. The EE funding in FY'99 is about $80 million -- or 13% -- above FY'98. So, if our math is correct, EE/RE combined received an increase of $94 million or almost 11%. On the RE side, DOE's EE/RE Office has $18 million to allocate as it chooses but must run its proposed allocation by the congressional appropriations committee staff in advance. We have received a 5-page set of tables which provides the breakdown of the complete FY'99 EE/RE budget including the add-on. Let us know if you would like us to fax you a copy.
ELECTRIC UTILITY RESTRUCTURING
Green Power Critique:
Public Citizen has released a new study, "Green Buyers Beware: A Critical Review of 'Green Electricity' Products" which argues that the marketing of "green" electricity in California's newly deregulated utility market is largely a hoax and results in little or no benefit to the environment. The green electricity bought by California consumers comes largely from renewable energy sources controlled by utilities and is already paid for by those utilities' customers. The electricity is simply being repackaged and sold at higher prices. The result of a consumer's purchase of green electricity can, in some cases, lead to the extended operation of fossil fuel plants and greater pollution. Specifically, consumers who choose green electricity pay an average of $10 extra per month for it; an estimates 75-95% of that cost goes toward covering marketing and overhead and does not result in an expansion of renewable energy generation. The report's executive summary can be found at www.citizen.org.
CLIMATE CHANGE
1.) WWF Climate Poll:
A new poll released October 20 by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) finds that 79% of Americans support the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, including 84% of the Democrats, 79% of Independents, and 73% of Republicans. This represents a significant increase since the beginning of the year, when 54% of the participants in a similar WWF poll said they favored a global warming treaty. The survey of 1,000 registered voters by the Mellman Group also found that 66% believes the United States should cut its greenhouse gas emissions unilaterally even if other countries do not. An even larger majority --71 percent -- said they disapproved of Congressional efforts to block the EPA from implementing domestic carbon pollution reduction programs. Furthermore, 75% said they would be willing to pay $10 more per month in their electricity bills to purchase clean energy such as solar or wind power from their utility companies; 64% said they would pay $20 per month more. The news release can be found at www.wwf.org/new/news/pr167.htm. For further info, contact Jennifer Morgan (WWF) at 202-778-9514.
2.) Shell/Kyoto:
On October 16, oil giant Royal Dutch Shell announced that it would cut its global emissions of greenhouse gases by at least 10% from 1990 levels by 2002. Its commitment mirrors a similar pledge made by British Petroleum last month. Shell says it intended to exceed the emissions reductions targets set in the Kyoto agreement through the decade until the year 2010. The company aims to reach those targets by reducing its own emissions as well as helping its customers to reduce theirs by promoting renewables, alternative fuels, and "market solutions." Shell's biggest single short-term option for cutting emissions will be to reduce venting and flaring of natural gas in exploration and production activities.
3.) Extreme Weather:
On October 21, the U.S. Public Interest Research Group released a new report, "The Rising Cost of Global Warming," which warns that recent extreme weather in the U.S is part of a global trend of rising frequency and cost of extreme weather events that is consistent with scientists' predictions about global warming. In a report on the study, NBC News noted that "in recent years, the damage cost of natural disasters worldwide has grown dramatically. In the 1960's, the cost per year ranged from $5 billion to $10 billion a year; but in recent years, the cost has been about $55 billion a year. Federal aid for disasters has soared from less than $500 million a year through most of the 1980's to three to four times as much in the 1990s. In fact, the 10 most costly natural disasters ever in the United States have all occurred within the past 10 years." The report can be found at www.pirg.org/enviro/global_w/cost98/page1.htm; for further info, call Katherine Silverthorne (202-546-9707).MISCELLANEOUS
1.) REPP Report:
The Renewable Energy Policy Project has released a new report, "Putting It Together: Whole Buildings and a Whole Buildings Policy" by Donald Aitken and the Passive Solar Industries Council. The authors argue that to approach a building's siting, design, material selection, financing, construction, and operation in piecemeal fashion neglects the fact that buildings are "an integrated system of interacting components." They present several cases of successful whole buildings approaches and suggest measures to create a healthy policy framework for buildings. The report can be found at https://www.repp.org.
2.) LCV Scorecard:
The League of Conservation Voters has now released its annual National Environmental Scorecard. Each member of the U.S. Congress is rated on the most significant and environmental votes in this session of Congress. See https://scorecard.lcv.org/.
3.) Building Efficiency:
The new Alliance to Save Energy animated Home$weet Home TV spot has aired in 125 markets in 47 states on 172 stations -- worth over a half million dollars -- just in the first eight weeks. It discusses ways for consumers to save energy and money through residential energy conservation. The spot as well as extensive tips on how to save energy in one's home can be viewed in streaming video on the Web at www.homesweethome.org or www.ase.org/homesweethome along with the storyboard and the matching radio spots.
To: Energy & Environmental Activists
VOTERS RATE ELECTED OFFICIALS "ONLY FAIR" OR "POOR" ON EFFORTS TO REDUCE U.S. DEPENDENCY ON OIL IMPORTS AS NATION OBSERVES 25TH ANNIVERSARY OF 1973 OIL EMBARGO
For Release: October 21, 1998 Contact: Henry Griggs 202-326-8714 Wednesday - 9:00 a.m. Ken Bossong 301-270-2258
Washington DC -- A new public opinion survey released today reveals that American voters rate the efforts of their elected officials to reduce U.S. dependence on oil imports during the 25 years since the commencement of the OPEC oil embargo on October 25, 1973 as "only fair" or "poor." More than four out of five believe that the U.S. is still vulnerable in 1998 to an energy crisis that could be caused by foreign nations shutting off their oil supplies to this country.
Most Americans remember the energy crises of the 1970s and are aware that the United States now imports more than half its oil (53% gross, 48% net), compared to a third in 1973. By lopsided margins and regardless of political party affiliation, they consider this dependence to be a serious threat to the nation's economy and jobs, as well as to its standard of living, the environment, and their national security.
Moreover, there is a broad consensus about options for reducing the nation's dependence on foreign oil. Approximately 80% of registered voters polled favor raising fuel efficiency standards for automobiles and sports utility vehicles as well as expanding the use of vehicles powered by natural gas, renewable fuels like ethanol, and electricity. On the other hand, a clear majority (57%) of Americans oppose opening new oil drilling in restricted or protected U.S. oil areas and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
These are among the findings of a new public opinion survey, "America Speaks Out on Energy: Foreign Oil Dependency," conducted for the Sustainable Energy Coalition by the Republican polling firm of Research/Strategy/Management, Inc. of Rockville, Maryland. The survey includes 14 questions and reflects interviews with 1,003 registered voters between September 22-28, 1998; it has a margin of error of +/-3.1%.
"Americans know the nation's dependence on oil imports is a serious problem and getting worse," said Reid Detchon, Co-Director of the American Bioenergy Association. "They want more out of their political leaders and rate them only fair to poor in dealing with the problem so far. They recognize that the best solutions are improved fuel efficiency standards and the development of alternative, cleaner fuels."
The Sustainable Energy Coalition is a coalition of 35 national business, environmental, consumer, and energy policy organizations (list available upon request) founded in 1992 to promote a shift in federal energy priorities from nuclear power and fossil fuels to renewable energy and energy efficiency.
Copies of the 60-page report "America Speaks Out on Energy: Foreign Oil Dependency" are available for $15 from the Sustainable Energy Coalition. A copy of the 10-page executive summary is available without charge.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.) A clear majority (62%) of voters recall (57%), or were otherwise aware of (5%), the energy crises of the 1970's that resulted in increased energy bills, long gas lines, and doubling of gasoline prices.
2.) When asked what percentage of oil the United States presently imports, respondents estimated it to be about 58% -- a figure fairly close to the actual figure of 53% gross imports (48% net imports).
3.) It is therefore not surprising that more than four out of five voters (83%) believe that the United States is now very (47%) or somewhat (36%) vulnerable to an energy crisis that would be caused by foreign nations shutting off their supply of oil to the United States.
4.) By a similarly high margin (86%) believe that U.S. dependence on foreign oil is a very (38%) or somewhat (48%) serious threat to the nation's economy and people's jobs.
5.) Likewise, more than 80 percent (82%) believe that U.S. dependence on foreign oil is a very (37%) or somewhat (45%) serious threat to our standard of living.
6.) Moreover, twenty-five years after the 1973 OPEC oil embargo and seven years after the Persian Gulf War, more than three-quarters (77%) believe that U.S. dependence on foreign oil today is a very (39%) or somewhat (38%) serious threat to our national security.
7.) An almost equal level (70%) also see U.S. dependence on foreign oil as being a very (30%) or somewhat (40%) serious threat to the environment.
8.) Consequently, voters give elected officials an overall grade of only C- for their efforts in dealing with U.S. dependence on foreign oil over the past 25 years with more than five times the number of failing "F" grades (11%) compared to excellent "A" grades (2%).
9.) There is a broad consensus among American voters about options for reducing the nation's dependency on foreign oil.
10.) By an overwhelming margin (80%), voters favor raising fuel efficiency standards for automobiles and sports utility vehicles (SUV's); in fact, almost half (49%) of the respondents "strongly" support this option while another 31% "somewhat" favor it. By an equally high margin (81%), voters favor increasing fuel economy standards specifically for light trucks, minivans, and SUV's with a solid majority (58%) being "strongly" in favor.
11.) By almost equal margins, voters favor a variety of options for developing and expanding the use of alternative fuels to power their cars. More than four-fifths of respondents (83%) strongly (39%) or somewhat (44%) favor the use of natural gas for transportation while 80% favor increasing the use of renewable transportation fuels such as ethanol (strongly: 37%, somewhat: 43%) and 78% favor increasing the use of electric vehicles (strongly: 37%, somewhat: 41%).
12.) On the other hand, a majority of voters (57%) strongly (37%) or somewhat (20%) oppose opening new oil drilling in restricted or protected U.S. offshore areas and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge while only 16% strongly favor such a policy and 25% are somewhat in favor. This opposition comes even after people have been asked a series of questions about U.S. vulnerability to foreign oil and the grave consequences this may have.
NEXT PAGE -->
|